Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
 ....MAN.. I have no idea what ya talkin about Jase  but it sure sounds good...compared to my way too simple processing...and nipples 
If there aren't too many subs with nipples and sattelite trails...wouldn't it be better just to discard the worst ones? All that fudge processing has to affect the final image quality, surely? You don't get anything for nothing as they say. |
Well Mike, can't help you if you're not up with the CCDStack lingo. What I explained is far from rocket science.
If you're impacted by seeing using long focal lengths, yes you'd certainly discard those subs. Providing the subs that contain the anomalies you mention had a low FWHM, I'd be keeping them. Why throw out good data because a few plane trails, cosmic ray hits or star "nipples" are present? Not exactly productive imaging. The chance of these anomalies overlapping (especially when dithering) are extremely unlikely, so use tools of the trade to your advantage.